Thought this was interesting. PLEASE NO BODY GET OFFENDED. I'd hate for this to become a rag session because of the word "fetish".. I thought the parts that talked about awareness in the mainstream are applicable to size acceptance/ fat sexuality acceptance.

Yea, I agree. I posted it because outside of the FA community, if someone has a preference for larger women (or men), they are called "chubby chasers" and fat fetishists. This article talks about other things that many used to see as strange fetishes that have now become accepted in the mainstream. Because of exposure, and enough people being open about it. I think this applies to the FA community.

This is an interesting find. I'm always fascinated by fetishes and where they come from. I know most people here wouldnt classify their FA-ness as a fetish but to some extent I do. To me a fetish is anything that is necessary to become sexually aroused. I coudn't enjoy myself without some element of fat-play either with my partner or myself. Although I would argue that its not just a fetish as being an FA effects many parts of my life, not just sexually. But anyway, thats another debate for another time. I have seen FA-dom become more mainstreamed over the years though movies and talk shows although the light isn't always positive. I hope with time it will lose some of its stigma like the other fetishes mentioned. Thats pretty cool.

^While I would agree that some aspects of this type of community reflect a real and deeply felt experience of the fetishization of the fat/thinness dichotomy, I think the more logical place to see that most powerfully on display is actually outside of it. Many of us (certainly not me, of course), I suspect, are secretly "more normal," more disposed of a healthier and more pragmatic affect than those of us who've been seduced by the "you can never be too rich or too thin" mantra.

That merely being open to a physical attraction to fat partner is portrayed as such (basically, as a deviation from the norm); just helps to underscore which end of this continuum depends more heavily on early and persistent social reinforcement (Hollywood, TV, Commercials, mainstream-fashion, medicine, family-relationships, etc...) And so, I think, a lot of what you see developed-here is a just a simple and, perhaps, innate resistance to the ubiquity & overload of this or, really, any type of "programming."

I mean, imagine if we lived in some sort of society where men should only be attracted to women who're roughly 20% younger with long hair and women should only be attracted to men who're 5% taller with short hair. Or where people of different racial or religious backgrounds self-segregated, at least in terms of matching. There would certainly be a fairly large portion of people who were both, simultaneously, affected by these limitations; but, nonetheless did not feel particularly encumbered by them. Just as there would be some who would rail against them. Just as some seem to disregard them, on some selective basis. So, in that light, which group is really demonstrating a disposition toward fetish-objectification?